From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id l92NNH9d031791 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:23:19 -0700 Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 09:23:05 +1000 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: sync_blockdev in xfs_flush_device_work Message-ID: <20071002232304.GG23367404@sgi.com> References: <20070929110921.GA2466@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070929110921.GA2466@lst.de> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:09:21PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > How is the sync_blockdev in the ENOSP path going to help it? It only > syncs the block device mapping which XFS doesn't use it at all. Not really sure - it's probably a left over from when XFs was using it, but still that makes no difference to ENOSPC flushing.. I think we can kill it... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group